Converting the Saints: A Study of Religious Rivalry in America

by Charles Randall Paul

Missions are attacks no matter how benign the motive. The history of religious missions is replete with complex social, political, economic, and religious conflict. This historical study of how Americans have managed or mismanaged past religiously-influenced conflicts can provide practical wisdom for our time when many social, political, and economic conflicts are strongly influenced by religious factors. We live in local and global societies that are deeply troubled if not torn apart by the perennial problem of religious or ideological conflict between uncompromising rivals that desire mutually exclusive religious and political ends. Converting the Saints focuses on American religious history and particularly on the early-twentieth-century Protestant missions to Utah to convert Mormons to traditional Christian belief. After the Mormons acquiesced to federal laws against polygamy and federal pressure to secularize Utah’s governance, the religious conflict over Mormonism’s Christian legitimacy remained unresolved. This was a religious conflict that, in true American style, was engaged as a contest of persuasion held on the figurative battlefield for the human heart. Both rivals understood this, and while unsettled by their mutual opponent’s aggressive criticisms, they did not think it wrong or even strange for their rival to engage them. Centering on the cases of three Protestant missions in Utah, this study explores the crucial understanding at the center of the American that persuasive contestation over religion, ideology, or founding principles is normal in our secular State, and even healthy for free citizens to flourish within a diverse society.

Genres: Religion

290 pages, Hardcover

Published August 7, 2018

Reviews

[Bridget Jeffries · Rating 4 out of 5]

Once upon a time, little 18-year-old evangelical me was sitting in an LDS Institute class when the teacher wrote the word "apostacy" on the board, so I corrected him that it's spelled "apostasy." One of my Mormon classmates joked that I knew that because I was an apostate Christian. I smiled and corrected him that it's because it has the same suffix as "heresy."

Whether one is a member of heretical Mormonism, apostate Christianity, or some other "Gentile" collective, *Converting the Saints* contains a message that our increasingly polarized nation needs to hear: namely, that "persuasive contestation over religion, ideology, or founding principles is normal in our secular state; and that contestation is even healthy for free citizens to flourish within a diverse society." This message is set against the backdrop of the irenic missionary efforts of three early 20th century Protestant missionaries to Utah and the Mormon response to them---and by "irenic" I mean there were no Hahn's Mills or Mountain Meadows Massacres, not that they never had harsh words for one another. Their desire to persuade others without resorting to violence is presented as an example to us all, and this is where the book is most admirable.

Also admirable is the book's presentation of the three Protestant missionaries in question, their lives, their missions, and their differing perspectives on outreach to the Saints. Franklin Spencer Spalding is particularly intriguing, and also deeply tragic in that he was the shortest lived. It turns out that Craig Blomberg, Richard Mouw, Greg Johnson, and those of us who have called for respectful engagement with Mormonism as opposed to counter-cult tactics were not starting something new, but perhaps (ironically) restoring something that was lost.

The book has its downsides. Paul has an unfortunate tendency to tell, not show, to overly summarize broad topics where some well-synthesized examples would go much further in making his point. There are far more secondary sources discussed than there are primary sources, and I'm not certain that three Protestant missionaries over a period of ~20 years is really enough for a "study." We are also repeatedly told that the Protestant missionaries had little success with the book's title, yet the book never focuses in on successful conversions---and there must have been at least a few. I would expect a book about "converting the saints" to feature, well, some converted saints.

Overall, this is a commendable book. Hug an apostate / heretic today!

[Trevor Wolfe · Rating 4 out of 5]

It is a good, solid book about Protestant Christians in the early 20th Century to the LDS community. We got to learn about some of the Christians methods in what ways seem accusatory and what is acceptable in how to dialogue and listen. We can learn from the pioneers on what works and doesn't work. Christians and LDS should keep in mind that we are living human beings with souls that are created in the image of God, and that we want the best for each other.

[Kevin Folkman · Rating 4 out of 5]

Charles Randall Paul uses the historical perspective of Protestant missionary efforts to Utah Mormons in the early 20th century as a means to promoting a new dialogue between competing religious and ideological beliefs, abandoning coercion in favor of what he calls “persuasive contestation.” He’s persuaded me. He provides an intriguing look into how we can turn the tumultuous cacophony of partisanship into constructive engagement and promote peace in our increasingly diverse American democracy.

[Vaughn · Rating 4 out of 5]

Normally one thinks of Mormon missionaries (pairs of young men in white shirts, or young women in dresses) going door to door engaging in conversation about religion and belief. This book turns that common sight around slighlty - it covers the proselytization of Utah Mormons by other denominations.

In a broader sense, it invites the reader to consider coexistence with those whose motives and beliefs are disagreeable or even threatening. In our current climate of dispute and distrust, this book challenges ones notion of being "right" and suggests a way towards respect.

Highly recommended for self-reflection and interesting history.

[Austin · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was a very interesting read. It feels like two separate books combined together, which has its pluses and minuses. The first few and last two chapters are more theoretical and normative, making an argument for how people who disagree about religion (or other matters) should behave towards each other. The thesis here, as I understand it, is that trying to find common ground shouldn't be the ultimate goal. Instead people should take a more realistic approach and realize that they'll never be able to convert everyone to their own "side" (and even if they somehow could, differences within that side would immediately become the warring camps anyway). So disagreement should be focused more on clear, honest argument that allows for vulnerability--the possibility that one may be influenced and perhaps even converted to the side one is arguing against. The key ingredient ultimately is that disagreement exist *without coercion*. The author asserts that much more important than common ground is engaging in debate that respects one's rival as trustworthy; no amount of common ground can make up for debaters who impugn the other side's motives. As the author puts it in the introduction:

The Christian Bible provocatively reveals there was war in heaven. So how on earth can the cultural and religious inheritors of that sacred text expect tranquility?

The author argues, sometimes more persuasively than others, that America is, at its best, built on such an approach to disagreement. He discusses the Civil War, the federal government's fight against Mormonism, and the American conflicts with Native Americans as part of this argument: instances where violence or at least governmental coercion broke out, but which failed to achieve the unity that the winners had hoped for. The author seems to be arguing that since violence doesn't work, it's better to engage in wars of words in good faith.

After a few more chapters of throat-clearing background history and theology laying out the fundamental disputes between Protestants and Mormons, the second book begins with the three middle chapters. Three different Protestant missionaries to Utah in the early 20th century are profiled, along with their methods, personalities, and successes (or lack thereof). These are the most engaging chapters as they tell the clearest narrative. Mormon history has, naturally, tended to focus on the Latter-day Saints themselves, but it's fascinating to get a look at their culture and religion as viewed by their rivals living among them. And these missionaries' stories are captivating in their own right.

The most enjoyable aspect to me was seeing how similar their missionary experiences to the Mormons were to my (Mormon) missionary experiences to Protestants in Europe. They expressed frustration that their *obvious* truth was so hard to get through to people whose minds were "so soaked through and through with the untrue teachings of Mormonism, like a water-logged timber that has been in a pond for many years." One of the missionaries even advises his fellow believers that "Every church member should be a missionary"--a phrase that would be popularized slightly more succinctly a few decades later among the Mormons themselves! There is also a brief reference to one of the Protestant missionaries getting in a fistfight with the son of LDS prophet Joseph F. Smith in New York, where the Protestant was giving an anti-Mormon lecture; I just wish more detail had been included!

The book concludes with some analysis of the similarities and differences in the three missionaries' approaches, as well as a return to the theme of honorable, peaceful, but vigorous disagreement as the ideal.

I'd give the middle chapters a 5/5 for bringing to light a fascinating and important story. The rest gets 3/5 for being a bit uneven in its history and analysis, as well as sometimes a bit scattershot in throwing out the names and ideas of previous scholars without sufficiently contextualizing them and tying them into the main narrative. Also, it was very annoying to have the footnotes only give titles/authors of works and requiring you to flip to the bibliography to get more details (a number of times I was curious what year a cited source was written but didn't want to go from the text to the footnote to the bibliography--and hopefully back again--just to get that info so I just gave u and kept reading). Those nits aside, this is a very cool book and I'm glad I read it. I learned a lot more about Protestant/Mormon interactions in the early 20th century, and it gave me a lot to chew on regarding how we should disagree with others--obviously a very timely issue in today's America.

Full disclosure: Greg Kofford Books gave me a free eBook version of this book in return for posting my own thoughts.

[Crismon Lewis · Rating 3 out of 5]

In this book, Paul aims to establish generally the religious conditions and distinctions of the Mormons vis-a-vis the Protestant heritage from which they left. He then gives three case studies of how Protestant missionaries proselytized to Mormons, with one focused on individual conversion, another on polemical attack, and the final being a type of intellectual assimilation. The book aims to show how contending religious traditions can co-exist without violence or coercion. The scholarship is well documented with lengthy footnotes and a great deal of sources.

Meanwhile, Paul makes sweeping generalizations about "Mormons" and "Protestants" such that they appear as the only major contenders in early American religious history. Much of the individual case studies focus exclusively on the approaches of the missionaries and are bereft of concrete examples of Protestant converts, community engagement, and LDS church leadership reactions to this outreach (the one exception being the interesting association of B. H. Roberts and Protestant missionary Franklin Spalding). Further elaboration would help the reader gain a better understanding of these missionaries approaches and their effect overall. Meanwhile, the writing is a bit choppy in places and is not particularly engaging.

[Michael Carver · Rating 4 out of 5]

How did the early saints in Utah react when they were on the receiving end of missionary work from other religions? How were Mormons viewed then? Has much changed? What were the differences? The similarities? Why weren't members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints considered Christians and why is that thinking continued today? Charles Randall Paul offers a tremendously valuable look at history, complete with copious notes and commentary on our differences and what it's going to take to come to terms with this one realization; you believe you are right and I believe I am right, so how do we learn to live together peacefully when we have such a wide societal impasse? I have learned a great deal from this book and how we can better live the "Golden Rule" and even the "second great commandment." This book is hard to put down. I will read it many times and I recommend it highly. Because the noise, religiously and politically needs to be tempered and we need more open arms and less contention. Paul recommends genuinely respectful ways to meet in the middle and be ok with it.

[Dave LeFevre · Rating 4 out of 5]

I enjoy history and this book is all of that, covering various interactions between Latter-day Saints and other groups who had strong and serious doctrinal and social disagreements. The goal of the book, however, is not just to tell a historical story but to promote the notion of "religious diplomacy" where parties with opposing views and discuss those differences with respect and even acceptance. His premise is that the USA was founded on such a notion, that we've lost it, and need to return to it. It's not to promote conflict as much as open discussion of such conflict without violence or confrontation, a welcome notion in our world today. The author offers three examples of Protestants trying (though in only few cases succeeding) to convert Mormons in Utah to their views of Christianity. Some were more confrontational but all very sincere and motivated by what they felt was the salvation of souls diverted from the truth. An interesting read for anyone wanting to better understand inter-faith issues in late 19th and early 20th century America.

[Matt · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book comes at a time when it feels like our various religious denominations are following the political lines of America. In this book, the author (Charles Randall Paul) explores to parts of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries to examine what various Christian organizations did to covert others—and themselves. For a topic that I didn’t expect to be very exciting I was pleasantly surprised. Paul writes intelligently and articulately while managing to show the reader that the religious divisions that seem to dominate the news cycle is, sadly, nothing new. Being a fan of history, I found the book fun and informative. Fortunately, the best part of the book for me was the conclusion. Paul is clearly a teacher, because he takes the history he has just laid out and points us to the future by suggesting realistic and seemingly easy steps all Christian denominations—and non-Christian as well—can do to help us all practice what we preach.

[Dave · Rating 4 out of 5]

When many people think of Mormons, one of the first things they think of is Mormon missionaries—predominantly young adults out and evangelizing to the world, trying to convert it. But in both the 19th and 20th century there were significant efforts from Protestant missionaries to convert Mormons in Utah and elsewhere.

Converting the Saints offers an interesting look at the dynamics of co-existing religious cultures, each of which firmly believes the other is wrong. What challenges did that bring to our society? What opportunities? How did it shape where we are today? There’s lots of thought-provoking issues here, and plenty to make you wonder about the nature of religion in the 21st century, too.

[Michael Farrell · Rating 4 out of 5]

The book was fascinating, I loved reading it. Charles Paul is a smart guy and I was concerned it would be over my head but it wasn't at all. Very accessible. I would also note that he's done some serious research in writing this book. Always a breath of fresh air.

Lastly, I loved this quote from the opening of the book, "Without a legitimate and honorable place for religious and ideological persuasive contestation, frustrated advocates for change will find other means to contest seemingly unresolvable matters—including turning to inter-tribal or international wars or disruptive violence against civilian order."

[Judy · Rating 4 out of 5]

A little uneven for me. Overall, the book felt a bit disjointed—as if it were three books that the author tried to meld into one. The first and third parts were less interesting to me and rate 3*. The part I liked best was the middle section that discussed just what it is about Mormonism that bothers Protestants. Very useful for me in my interfaith work and that part is worth 5*.